I think it's more like calling someone a good person even though everyone understands a good person has flaws, or calling someone a bad person even though they've done a few good things, if you like.
Regardless of your personal feelings, when someone advocates a regulation-free environment, they mean one with those minimal market regulations. This is understood in any conventional( * ), practical discussion as well as most philosophical, legal and economic debates. If all parties understand this, and would prefer to use shorthand in order to quickly arrive at the heart of a particular matter, then I question whether it can be considered dishonest.
* By conventional, I mean to exclude, for example, a discussion between two anarchists -- I mean a mainstream discussion taking place in Western civilization.
Edit: I need to clarify that while this is all understood, it may be forgotten by someone in any particular moment. However, if reminded they will likely have no objection. This is what I meant when referring to people who forget in my earlier post.
Regardless of your personal feelings, when someone advocates a regulation-free environment, they mean one with those minimal market regulations. This is understood in any conventional( * ), practical discussion as well as most philosophical, legal and economic debates. If all parties understand this, and would prefer to use shorthand in order to quickly arrive at the heart of a particular matter, then I question whether it can be considered dishonest.
* By conventional, I mean to exclude, for example, a discussion between two anarchists -- I mean a mainstream discussion taking place in Western civilization.
Edit: I need to clarify that while this is all understood, it may be forgotten by someone in any particular moment. However, if reminded they will likely have no objection. This is what I meant when referring to people who forget in my earlier post.